INCREASED PRODUCTION FOR RUMANIAN METALLURGICAL PLANTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: R
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 24, 2011
• Sequence Number: 258
• Publication Date: January 19, 1953
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3
CLASSIFICATIONCURRESTRICTED
ITY INFORMATIO;d
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
INFORMATION FROM
FOREIGN DOCUMENTS OR RADIO BROADCASTS
COUNTRY
SUBJECT
HOW
PUBLISHED
WHERE
PUBLISHED
DATE
PUBLISHED
LANGUAGE
Economic - Ferrous metallurgy
Daily newspapers
Bucharest
12 - 26 Jul 1952
1X11 00001[!7 CONTAI AI III IOINATI0I AIIECTII. T5E IAIIOFAA D[I[ll[
OP TN[ UNITED STATES \ITNI[ TN[ 1G1II1 0I [SPI0lA0[ ACT ID
N. I. 0.. 11 AND 52.11 01[110[0. III TIANINIIIIO2 DI TMI I[YILATIOI
Dr ITS UONTDVTI I1 ATE 1111[1 TD Al 01AYTN011TED PINTO! II P10.
51117[5 IT MN. IIPTODYCTI01 01 THIS IDI1 Il PIOOIIIT[D.
INCREASED PRODUCTION FOR RUMANIAN METALLURGICAL PI:.NTS
5ummary Sovrommetal and other metallurgical enterprises in Ru-
mania are taking measure9 to increase the output of steel and steel
products. Soviet methods were introduced at Resits. A new blast fur-
nace was announced at an unspecified location. Miners of Teliuc car-
ried on a drive to increase production of ferrous metals. In addition,
conferences were held to discuss steel and machinery production.
Numbers in parentheses refer to appended sources .7
Sovrommetal of Resits is making every effort to supply industry with steel.
Steel is needed particularly in the machine-building industry and for the manu-
facture of agricultural equipment, according to Traian Iancu, chief of the Siemens-
Martin. Steel Section of Sovrommetal, Resita. Sovrommetal has introduced competi-
tions to increase output to meet this need. In the first quarter of 1952, workers
and technicians of the Siemens-Martin Steel Section produced 5 percent more steel
than planned. This was achieved not only through competitions but also with the
aid of new equipment and Soviet methods.(1) Stakhanovites and I-ading workers
throughout Resita attained outstanding results. Some produced up to four times
their assigned norms. Thus, for example, lathe operator Ion Ungherman, a Stakhan-
ovite, in working on his 1955 quote. with the aid of the Antonina Zhandarova method.
Lathe operator Tudcr Peia, also a Stakhano-rite, leading lathe operator Vasile
Stangu, Dumitru Enascu, and others are working on 1954 quotas, using the Baykov-
Dortkevich method, Twelve smelting and loading teams, including those under Vucu
Stangu and Vaaile Benea are working on 1954 quotas. In Sovrommetal, Resita, as
a whole, 73 men are working on 1953 quotas, 37 on 1951- quotas, and 11 are termi-
nating their entire Five-year Plan quotas.(2)
Production was not steady at the Siemens-Martin section, however. Steel out..
put was 14 percent above the plan for the period 1.5 rebruary - 31 March, but
8 percent below in the first half of February. In the first 15 days of January,
production was 7 percent below the quota. This failure to maintain steady produc-
tion is due to the poor organization of work in the Siemens-Martin section, the
steel section, and other parts of the cor.bine, _^echni.cians are too conservative
to g:ahp the importance of rising capacity and increaLEd production.
CD N0.
DATE OF
DATE DIST. Iq Jan 1953
NO. OF PAGES 3
SUPPLEMENT TO
REPORT NO.
THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMATION
STATE
ARMY
NAW
[MR
CLASSIFICATION
NSRB
FBI
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3
Traian Iancu recently visited the Makeyevka and Dneprodzerzhinsk steel com-
bines in the USSR and is therefore qualified to point out errors at Resita. He
declared that the uneven production was not due to the insufficient capacity of
the smelting plants, but rather to the defective organization of furnace sections.
Insufficient attention was given to the maintenance of the furnace after each
charge. Time required for reheating was 10.7 percent greater in the first quarter
of 1952 than the 1951 average. Tools and equipment were not reconditioned prop-
erly at the beginning of 1952. The idle time of cranes was far beyond the admis-
sible limit. The smelting plant did not devote enough attention to cleanliness
and neatness. Many times overhead cranes and bridges were not ready, so that
smelting could not be performed according to the cyclic graph. These factors con-
tributed to an unpermissible increase In the cost of steel. Other migtakes preva-
lent in the Siemens-Martin section were the failure of the plant railroad to make
cars available on time, and the poor scrap-iron supply which resulted in steel of
lower quality than desired.
To improve this situation, the collective of the section took measures to re-
organize work at the smelting shops. A stricter liaison was established between
the scrap-iroi, yard, the plant railroad, and the furnaces. The Soviet Matulinets
method of rapid charges was introduced. The time of furnace maintenance was cut
down, and the plan for the utilization of furnaces was revised. The results of
these measures were soon apparent. In the first half of February 1952, more teams
surpassed quotas. The team of first smelter Radivoi Taranu, for example, overful-
filled its March quota 27 percent, that of first smelter Ion Popa, 20 percent.
Teams of first smelters Ion Garas, Laurentiu Kostner, and Constantin Morariu cut
the time for preparation of charges and wcre thus able to produce hundreds of ions
of steel above the plan. Heaps of wastes, slag, and brick were removed from the
smelting shops. The preparation of charges was coordinated with smelting and pro-
duction was further increased. In March, labor productivity rose 12.2 percent.
Significant economies were achieved ii June. The cost of production was cut 2.82
percent by the retional use of raw materiels and by better use of electrical en-
ergy.
The success of these methods demonstrates the need for extending them to all
furnaces.(1)
To publicize new methods in steel and steel-products, competitions between
Stakhanovites, leading workers, technicians, and lathe operators were organized
on 12 - 13 July by the Ministry of Metallurgical and Chemical Industries, the
Ministry of Electrical Energy and Electrical Equipment Industries, and the Federa-
tion of Metal-Chemical Unions. In addition, conferences were held during July at
large metallurgical enterprises. At these ronferences leading lathe operators
discussed methods of reducing the number of processing steps and thus the cost of
productio". An important conference for metalworkers was attended by Carol Loncear,
Miniit.: ;f Metallurgical and Chemical Industries, Gherasim Popa, Assistant Min-
ister ;,t' Metallurgical and Chemical Industries, Dumitru Simulescu, Assistant Min-
ister of Electrical Energy and Electrt;ai Equipment Industries, Mairovici (fnu),
secretary of the Federation of Metal-Chemical Unions, and numerous enterprise
managers.
Loncear, in the opening speech of this conference, declared that Soviet exper-
ience and methods constituted the principal means for reducing the number of steps
required in metal-processing. He also called for the spread of advanced methods
used in the 23 August Metallurgical Plant of Bucharest, the Electroputere (electri-
cal equipment) of Craiova, and Sovrommetal of Resita. A brigade leader of the
23 August Metallurgical Plant described methods used by a Stakhanovite brigade in
his plant. This brigade, consisting of 33 Stakhanovites, leading workers, and
engineers, used ;soviet smelting methods. By reducing the number of steps required
in forging a wheel they cut production time 10.6 percent and saved thousands of
kilograms of steel per year. Other speakers included the chief of the smelting
section of Electroputere and Engineer Hugo Hegel of Sovrommetal, Resita.
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3
 Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3
Principal problems of the metallurgical industry were described as the need
for trained personnel, the reduction of rejects, and the curtailing of idle time.
It was suggested that a research shop be set up in each enterprise to study new
models and to adapt them for pxoduction.(3)
A research shop was set up at Progresul Machinery Plant, Braila. This shop
studied suggestions and innovations for the increase of production and labor pro-
ductivity and for cost reductions. The plant management supplied the shop with
lathes, vises, and other necessary equipment. A recent rationalization suggested
by boilermaker Gheorghe Alexandru led to a saving of 8,500 lei. Master metalsmith
Vasile Avedic submitted a suggestion for the use of automatic water equipment to
loosen mold sands.(4)
It was announced on 16 July that a new blast furnace /ocation not indicated]
had been placed in operation to increase the supply of steel. Workers, engineers,
and technicians of Sovrommetal, Resita, of the 23 August Metallurgical Plant, Bu-
charest, of Flamura Rosie Railroad Car Plant, Arad, and other metallurgical ente*-
prises participated. The rapidity of construction was credited to the use of So-
viet machinery and the supervision of Soviet specialists. To complete the furnace
on schedule, electric and autogenous welding teams under Ion Traiestaru worked 5
days almost without interruption on the welding of pipes. A team of electricians
under Stefan Hors, fulfilled norms 300 percent. Metal workers under Victor Rogat-
enco reduced the time of installation of gas purification equipment 50 percent.
The construction of the furnace was made possible by the first domestic production
of blowers, made by 23 August Metallurgical Plant, leveling cars made by Flamura
Rosie Railroad Car Plant, Arad, and of other equipment. Four hundred technicians
working on the project were trained according to the Kotlyar method as masons,
steelworkers, ironworkers, cement workers, electric and autogenous welders, and
carpenters.
The furnace was expected to produce hundreds of tons of steel daily toward
the fulfillment of the equipment needs of mining, petroleum, agriculture, and
industrial enterprises-0)
The supply of minerals was expected to increase as a result of a drive car-
ried on by miners of Teliuc. Using Soviet methods, workers and technicians suc-
ceeded in increasing output 4.75 percent in June. This was accomplished by better
organization of work areas, and by full use of machines and aggregates. The cost
of production was reduced 16 percent in July while labor productivity increased
3.75 percent above the plan (4) The production of Teliuc was reported to be 563
tons above the plan as of 14 July.(6) In view of such encouraging results, the
miners started a campaign to fulfill the 1952 plan in 11 months. Thus between
1 - 17 July, miners produced 12.6 percent more minerals than planned. Among the
leading mining teams producing double the daily norm were those under Gbeorghe
Vasiu, Andrei Samoila, Simion Lucaci, Avram Lupulescu, and Ion Pus. Excavators
Aicolae Samoila and Ion Vitez were ahead of schedule.(4)
1.
Scanteia, 12 Jul 52
2.
Ibid,,
26 Jul 52
3.
Ibid.,
15 Jul 52
4.
Ibid.,
20 Jul 52
5.
Ibid.,
16 Jul 52
6.
Vista SSndicala, 18 Jul 52
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/10/25: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700100258-3